From Jesse Lee at the White House, via Twitter:

Jesse Lee @jesseclee44

Report: 54M more Americans got preventive care in 2011 b/c of #hcr 1.usa.gov/z0stUq GOP’s Blunt amendment would nix that guarantee 12:04 PM – 15 Feb 12

From the Department of Health and Human Services:

Fifty-Four Million Additional Americans Are Receiving Preventive Services Coverage Without Cost-Sharing Under The Affordable Care Act (February 2012)

And there’s this:

Posted at 11:09 AM ET, 02/15/2012

Why birth control is a good wedge issue against the GOP

By Greg Sargent

Some time around the end of February, the Senate will vote on the Blunt-Rubio amendment, which would allow insurers and employers to deny coverage for birth control or any other medical services simply on the grounds that they find them morally objectionable….

[emphasis added]

Senator Roy Blunt (r) wants to completely dismantle health care reform with this amendment.

And there’s this:

Mapping the Effects of the ACA’s Health Insurance Coverage Expansions

Who Benefits From the Affordable Care Act’s Coverage Expansions?

[The detail of Missouri from the map above. Roy Blunt’s old House district could lose a lot of coverage.]

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) includes two primary mechanisms for helping people afford health coverage. Starting in 2014, people with family incomes up to 138% of the poverty level ($31,809 for a family of four and $15,415 for a single person in 2012) will generally be eligible for the Medicaid program. And, people buying coverage on their own in new state-based health insurance exchanges will be eligible for federal tax credits to subsidize the cost of insurance. Tax credits will be calculated on a sliding scale basis for people with family income up to four times the poverty level ($92,200 for a family of four and $44,680 for a single person in 2012). (A calculator from the Kaiser Family Foundation illustrates the assistance people would be eligible for at different income levels and ages.)

The share of the population who will benefit from new Medicaid eligibility and the new health insurance tax credit will vary substantially throughout the country. We’ve illustrated that variation by estimating the share of the population in over 2,000 geographic areas across the U.S. who had family income up to four times the poverty level in 2010 and were either uninsured or buying coverage on their own.

On average, an estimated 17% of the non-elderly population nationwide would benefit from the Medicaid expansion and tax credits. In parts of Florida, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, and California, 36-40% of population could benefit.  In areas of Massachusetts, Hawaii, New York, and Connecticut – states that generally have high levels of employer-provided health insurance or have already implemented reforms to make insurance more accessible and affordable – 2-4% of the non-elderly could benefit from the coverage expansions in the ACA….

And, a press release from the Department of Health and Human Services:

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

News Division                                  

HHS Press Office

[….]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Affordable Care Act extended free preventive services to 1,102,000 Missouri residents with private health insurance in 2011

Free preventive care also provided to 729,472 Missouri residents in Medicare

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced today that the Affordable Care Act provided approximately 1,102,000 Missouri residents with at least one new free preventive service in 2011 through their private health insurance plans. Secretary Sebelius also announced that an estimated 729,472 Missouri residents with Medicare received at least one free preventive benefit in 2011, including the new Annual Wellness Visit, since the health reform law was enacted.

Together, this means an estimated 1,831,472 Missouri residents were helped by health reform’s prevention coverage improvements. The new data were released in two new reports from HHS.

“Americans of all ages can now get the preventive services they need, like mammograms and the new Annual Wellness Visit, free of charge, as a result of the new health care law,” Secretary Sebelius said. “With more people taking advantage of these benefits, more lives can be saved, and costly, and often burdensome, diseases can be prevented or caught earlier.”

Nationwide, the Affordable Care Act provided approximately 54 million Americans with at least one new free preventive service in 2011 through their private health insurance plans. And an estimated 32.5 million people with Medicare received at least one free preventive benefit in 2011, including the new Annual Wellness Visit, since the health reform law was enacted. Together, this means an estimated 86 million Americans were helped by health reform’s prevention coverage improvements.

The Affordable Care Act requires many insurance plans to provide coverage without cost sharing to enrollees for a variety of preventive health services, such as colonoscopy screening for colon cancer, Pap smears and mammograms for women, well-child visits, and flu shots for all children and adults. The law also makes proven preventive services free for most people on Medicare.

The report on private health insurance coverage also examined the expansion of free preventive services in minority populations.  The results showed that an estimated 6.1 million Latinos, 5.5 million Blacks, 2.7 million Asian Americans and 300,000 Native Americans across the country with private insurance received expanded preventive benefits coverage in 2011 as a result of the new health care law.

The report discussing Medicare preventive services found that more than 25.7 million Americans (582,585 Missouri residents) in traditional Medicare received free preventive services in 2011. The report also looked at Medicare Advantage plans and found that 9.3 million Americans (200,712 Missouri residents) – 97 percent of those in individual Medicare Advantage plans – were enrolled in a plan that offered free preventive services.  Assuming that people in Medicare Advantage plans utilized preventive services at the same rate as those with traditional Medicare, an estimated 32.5 million Americans (729,472 Missouri residents) benefited from Medicare’s coverage of prevention with no cost sharing.

The full report on expanded preventive benefits in private health insurance is available at http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/rep…  The report on expanded preventive benefits in Medicare and other ways that the Affordable Care Act strengthens Medicare is available at http://www.cms.gov/newsroom/.

###

Anyone think any of those folks who are registered voters would be partial to voting for Roy Blunt in the future if they knew what he was up to? Not hardly.

Previously: Roy Blunt tries to pull a fast
one (February 10, 2012)

Previously:

Funding contraception and freedom of conscience: Another manufactured controversy (February 8, 2012)

A win for women, and for Obama (February 10, 2012)

Shell game (February 10, 2012)

It’s all in the timing – a bill by Senator Scott Rupp (r) was introduced on Tuesday, February 7th:

SJR 49 Prohibits laws interfering with religious beliefs

Sponsor: Rupp

LR Number: 5676S.02I Fiscal Note not available

Committee: General Laws

Last Action: 2/9/2012 – Second Read and Referred S General Laws Committee Journal Page: S236

Title: Calendar Position:

Effective Date: Upon voter approval

Current Bill Summary

SJR 49 – Upon voter approval, this constitutional amendment provides that no law, regulation or rule shall compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, health care provider, or entity to provide coverage for any of the following medical services, if such medical services are contrary to the moral, ethical or religious beliefs or tenets of such person, employer, health care provider, or entity:

(1) Abortion;

(2) Contraceptives, including but not limited to all contraceptives approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration, emergency contraceptives;

(3) Abortion-inducing drugs; and

(4) Sterilization procedures.

Uh, yep.

@BuzzFeedBen Ben Smith

So did the Bishops just invite the GOP out onto a limb with them, then saw it off? 6 hours ago

This has been another edition of simple answers to simple questions.

From Public Policy Polling (PPP):

February 10, 2012

Our polling on the birth control issue

We’ve had a lot of people asking us this week if we’ve done any polling about the birth control issue.  We did a national survey for Planned Parenthood last weekend. Here are the key things we found [pdf]:

-56% of voters generally support the birth control benefit, while 37% are opposed. Independents strongly favor it, 55/36, and a lot more Republicans (36%) support it than Democrats (20%) oppose it. Women are for it by a 63/29 margin.

-Only 39% of voters support an exemption for Catholic hospitals and universities from providing the benefit, while 57% are opposed to one.

– There is a major disconnect between the leadership of the Catholic Church and rank and file Catholic voters on this issue. We did an over sample of almost 400 Catholics and found that they support the benefit overall, 53-44, and oppose an exception for Catholic hospitals and universities, 53-45. The Bishops really are not speaking for Catholics as a whole on this issue.

-Republican agitating on this issue could cause themselves trouble at the polls this year. 40% of voters say Mitt Romney’s stance makes them less likely to vote for him, while only 23% consider it a positive.  With the Catholic oversample it’s 46% less likely and 28% more likely. And Congressional Republicans are imperiling themselves as well. 58% of voters oppose them trying to take the benefit away, while only 33% are supportive.

Republicans will win this fall if they can convince voters that the economy stinks and it’s Barack Obama’s fault and putting them in power will fix the problem. If they want to make it about social issues and making it easy and affordable for women to access birth control, Democrats win.

They can’t help themselves, can they?

Digby sums it all up in three sentences:

….How changing the paperwork trail isn’t “cooperating with evil” and will salve the institution’s “conscience” is anyone’s guess. Apparently, God is mostly concerned about keeping up appearances. Who knew?…

We are not worthy.

…and it’s looking that way for more people.

And we ain’t Jane Hamsher, either.

From time to time we receive communications addressed to us here at Show Me Progress (and at They gave us a republic…, Blue Girl‘s shop) from individuals shopping a story, sending us a tip, and, every once in a while, bestowing an attaboy or attagirl upon one of our modest mudpies. Today I received an e-mail from a Washington, D.C. public relations firm addressed to me (at They gave us a republic…) which mentioned both blogs and our coverage of the republican debt hostage crisis (my terminology). The representative of the firm was shopping a point of view on “the health care compact”:

From: xxxxxxxxxx (xxxxx@craftdc.com)

Date: Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Subject: Attn: Michael Bersin; have you caught this Nixon veto?

To: WorthyDescendants@gmail.com

Good afternoon Michael,

I know you guys are busy at Show Me Progress and They Gave Us A Republic talking about the debt ceiling negotiations, but I thought you might be interested in some interesting news from Missouri, specifically the healthcare compact legislation that passed the Missouri state legislature in the last session. It has been sitting on Gov. Nixon’s desk for months and he is expected to veto the bill tomorrow without comment. The veto can be overridden in the next session, but I believe the people of Missouri deserve to hear their Governor explain why he is not signing the bill into law when it aims to give his state the authority over their federal healthcare dollars.

The health care compact isn’t a health policy reform-it’s a governance reform. If approved, it would give states the authority to determine how to spend their federal health care dollars, empowering member states to provide health care services (including Medicare and Medicaid) for their own citizens. It places the decision-making authority for health care policies at the state level, where the legislature would be free to tailor and pilot innovative programs that could simultaneously lower costs, while also improving health care.

See also Eric O’Keefe’s Daily Caller op-ed, Why Health Care Compact could be solution to Medicaid crisis, and his interview with Ben Domenech on Big Government.

The Texas legislature passed a version of the legislation last month and Gov. Rick Perry is expected to sign the bill into law on Monday. Georgia and Oklahoma have also signed health care compact bills into law and the legislation has been introduced in over a dozen other states.

Would you be interested in covering this?

Please be in touch with any questions you may have.

[xxxxxxx]

C   R   A   F   T       a uniquely integrated communications approach

Hmmm, what do the Missouri General Assembly, the Texas lege, Ben Domenech and Rick Perry have in common? Right, they’re either full of batshit crazy right wingnuts or are a representative sample of the same.

That was the first clue.

Let’s look at the biographies of the members of the public relations firm:

…After serving as a target state Executive Director for Bush-Cheney’04, Donahue headed the National 72-Hour Task Force for the Republican National Committee, directing grassroots programs, vote analysis and GOTV operations…

…Matthew has designed and built websites for countless political candidates, including Governor John Kasich, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Senator Mitch McConnell, Senator Pat Toomey, Senator Chuck Grassley, Senator George Allen, Senator Elizabeth Dole, Speaker John Boehner, Congressman Jim Nussle, and Congressman George Nethercutt, as well as organizations including Heritage Foundation, Americans for Prosperity, Club for Growth, Pickens Plan, Republican National Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee, Republican State Leadership Committee, various GOP state parties…

…Germany served the McCain campaign as their Director of Online Media…

…he was the New Media Advisor to the Senate Republicans in Senator McConnell’s Senate Republican Communication Center…

…He has managed Internet operations for three Presidential campaigns – Fred Thompson 2008, Bush-Cheney 04, and Quayle 2000. He served as the Republican National Committee’s first eCampaign Director following the 2004 campaign…

…Carol put her organizational and relationship-building skills to work for a variety of organizations, including Bush-Cheney ’04, Inc…

…Earlier in her writing career, she discovered the conservative blogosphere and its monumental influence on grassroots activism and moving information….

…Valerie was part of the 2010 team at the National Republican Senatorial Committee. As a Senior Research Analyst, she compiled opposition research for seven races, including Missouri and West Virginia…

You get the picture.

Obi-Wan: …You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.

That was the second clue.

Our Mission

CRAFT offers a uniquely integrated approach to winning political campaigns and promoting issues.

….9. We are responsible for protecting the privacy and security of our clients….

And boy would we like to know who they’re shopping this point of view for, wouldn’t you?

Then, there’s this, from the e-mail:

“…It places the decision-making authority for health care policies at the state level, where the legislature would be free to tailor and pilot innovative programs that could simultaneously lower costs, while also improving health care…”

Really, the republican controlled Missouri General Assembly has interest in “improving” health care by a means other than eliminating it for the have nots? That was the third clue.

The bill, HB 423, as approved by the republican controlled Missouri General Assembly:

HB 423 — HEALTH CARE COMPACT

This bill authorizes Missouri to adopt the provisions of the Health Care Compact to improve health care policy within the states by securing consent from the United States Congress to return the authority to regulate health care to the states that have adopted the compact by specifying that the state legislatures have the primary responsibility to regulate health care in their respective states.  Missouri and other states that join the compact may suspend federal laws, rules, regulations, and orders regarding health care that are inconsistent with the laws and regulations adopted by the member state pursuant to the compact.

Each member state will have the right to a specified amount of federal funds each fiscal year to support the exercise of the member state’s authority under the compact.  The federal funding cannot be conditional on any action of or regulation, policy, law, or rule being adopted by the member state.  At the beginning of each fiscal year, Congress must establish an initial funding level for each member state that must be calculated based on information provided by each member state and audited by the United States Go
vernment Accountability Office.

The Interstate Advisory Health Care Commission is established to study the issues of health care regulation of particular concern to the member states and may make nonbinding recommendations to them.  The commission must collect information and data to assist the member states in their regulation of health care, including assessing the performance of various state health care programs and compiling information on health care prices, and must make this information and data available to the legislatures of the member states.  The commission must not take any action within a member state that conflicts with any state law of that state.

The compact will become effective upon adoption by at least two member states and the consent of Congress unless Congress, in consenting to the compact, alters its fundamental purposes.

The compact can be amended by the unanimous agreement of the member states; and any amendment will be effective unless, within one year of its adoption, Congress disapproves the amendment.

“….Missouri and other states that join the compact may suspend federal laws, rules, regulations, and orders regarding health care that are inconsistent with the laws and regulations adopted by the member state pursuant to the compact….”

Anyone think allowing the republican controlled Missouri General Assembly free rein on this is a good idea? I thought so.

And the sponsors in the Missouri General Assembly?:

HB 423

Authorizes Missouri to adopt the provisions of the Health Care Compact to improve health care policy by returning the authority to regulate health care to the state legislatures

Sponsor: Burlison, Eric (136)

Co-Sponsor: Jones, Timothy (089) … et al.

The usual suspects. That was the fourth clue.

What, is this an ALEC astroturf bill? Just asking.

Oh, really:

The Tea Party’s Latest Scheme to Kill Health Reform

Conservative activists are pushing a radical Plan B to derail “Obamacare.”

– By Stephanie Mencime

Tue Mar. 29, 2011 12:01 AM PDT

The tea party has a new plan to attack health care reform. While some conservative activists are still fighting to get the law defunded and eventually repealed, others are organizing behind a radical, states’-rights proposal that would go beyond merely derailing health reform. Egged on by tea partiers, at least a dozen states are now contemplating legislation that supporters believe would allow them to seize control of and administer virtually all federal health care programs operating in their states and exempt them from the requirements of the health care law. That includes Medicare, the government health care program for the elderly on which a sizable number of tea partiers rely.

The vehicle for this reform end run is called the health care compact, an interstate compact not very different in theory from the ones states use to create regional transit authorities, for instance. Recently, the nation’s largest tea party group, the Tea Party Patriots, has thrown its weight behind the concept, seeing it as another way of downsizing the federal government. But the group may have other motivations, too. TPP has received a significant amount of money from the measure’s backer, the Health Care Compact Alliance, an organization bankrolled by the right-wing heir to a Texas construction company fortune. Last month, the Alliance underwrote TPP’s policy summit in Phoenix for a sponsorship advertised at $250,000. It has also become a regular advertiser on TPP’s website and email promotions….

Teabaggers. That was the fifth clue.

It’s a bad idea. A really bad idea. If implemented this will effectively cut off middle and lower income seniors from access to health care.

And Governor Jay Nixon’s (D) action?:

HB 423 – Authorizes Missouri to adopt the provisions of the Health Care Compact to improve health care policy by returning the authority to regulate health care to the state legislatures

July 14, 2011 – Allowed to go into effect pursuant to Article 3, Section 31 of the Missouri Constitution

[emphasis added]

Missouri Constitution

Article III

LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Section 31

Governor’s duty as to bills–time limitations–failure to return, bill becomes law.

Section 31. Every bill which shall have passed the house of representatives and the senate shall be presented to and considered by the governor, and, within fifteen days after presentment, he shall return such bill to the house in which it originated endorsed with his approval or accompanied by his objections. If the bill be approved by the governor it shall become a law. When the general assembly adjourns, or recesses for a period of thirty days or more, the governor shall return within forty-five days any bill to the office of the secretary of state with his approval or reasons for disapproval. If any bill shall not be returned by the governor within the time limits prescribed by this section it shall become law in like manner as if the governor had signed it.

[underline emphasis added]

He should have vetoed the bill.

From Representative Vicky Hartzler’s (r) town hall in Blue Springs, Missouri on April 28, 2011:

…We repealed the government takeover of health care. That, that’s my version, yes, it’s biased, but I can’t remember the name. It’s fancy name name, the path, uh, the patient protection, well, anyway, you remember, you know what bill I’m talking about. The Pre, the one which passed last year. Anyway, that is very, very costly and very onerous for job creation. Because it, health care costs for business are huge and now they cost have go, gone up even higher. So, the Path to Prosperity, uh, repeals that. In doing that it reduces the national debt which helps reduce that uncertainty, that dark cloud over businesses’ heads, consolidates programs, spends, brings spending down, targets wasteful programs, and repeals [inaudible]…

[emphasis added]

And this, too:

…It, uh, it required the Senate, and the Senate agreed, to have to have an up or down vote on repealing Obamacare and, uh, defunding Planned Parenthood. Those were two things that, uh, you know, might be helpful next year, uh, or not. And it also is requiring four studies of [inaudible] the true expenses of last year’s health care bill, uh, what it’s really gonna cost businesses, what are these regulations, what’s the impact going to be. And we, this information has been kind of withheld by [Secretary of Health and Human Services] Kathleen Sebelius and the department. And so this is gonna be very helpful as we look to, to, uh, find out and, and to discuss the merits of the program or whether it should be repealed…

[emphasis added]

Wait a minute, I thought you said “[w]e repealed the government takeover of health care.” And later it’s “to discuss the merits of the program or whether it should be repealed…” Which is it? You can’t have it both ways.

And people are so not into health care reform that they’re not taking advantage of any of the provisions that are just now kicking in. Or are they? (via Balloon Juice):

At Least 600,000 Young Adults Join Parents’ Health Plans Under New Law

By Phil Galewitz

KHN Staff Writer

May 03, 2011

Hundreds of thousands of young adults are taking advantage of the health care law provision that allows people under 26 to remain on their parents’ health plans, some of the nation’s largest insurers are reporting. That pace appears to be faster than the government expected.

WellPoint, the nation’s largest publicly traded health insurer with 34 million customers, said the dependent provision was responsible for adding 280,000 new members. That was about one third its total enrollment growth in the first three months of 2011….

Try repealing that and see where it gets you.

From Kay at Balloon Juice:

What Changed?

…The GOP House majority ran on repealing and replacing the PPACA. They have been busy since the election with holding useless, purely political votes in the House to repeal parts of the existing health care law. In fact, the one and only health care plan Republicans have put forth is Paul Ryan’s health care plan, which replaces Medicare with a private, underfunded voucher system and drastically cuts Medicaid under the guise of “block grants”.

Although we all know that around 40% of Medicaid spending currently goes to the elderly and the disabled, Ryan’s proposal for drastic cuts in Medicaid continues to be portrayed as gutting a program “for the poor”. Medicaid is a program that serves the poor but it also serves the most vulnerable people in the country: the elderly and the disabled. They’re not just “the poor”. And, Medicare and Medicaid are connected. It is disingenuous to talk about health care for the elderly and limit the discussion to Ryan’s 6,000 dollar Medicare vouchers. That isn’t the reality of people’s lives.

Republicans in the House are seeking repeal of a health care reform law that is benefiting people now, today, and they have offered nothing to replace it. Paul Ryan seeks to dramatically change the existing health care system, and has offered nothing to the people who would be without access to health care under his proposal. At the state level, Mitch Daniels in Indiana, under pressure from a certain conservative political faction, just agreed to deny access to clinics to 20,000 people who had access to those clinics.

Less than two years ago we had a health care debate in this country. We reached broad public consensus that we need to expand access to health care. Conservatives are now seeking to limit access to health care or, in the case of Mitch Daniels, actually limiting access, and no one seems to notice.

Did I miss something here? Did the public intellectuals and media personalities decide somewhere along the line that we don’t need to expand access to health care, but instead need to limit access? What changed?

[emphasis added]

“….Conservatives are now seeking to limit access to health care….” From the republican point of view that’s a feature, not a bug.

Yesterday, the bill setting up a health insurance exchange for Missouri, HB 609, unanimously passed in the House.

…establishes the Show-Me Health Insurance Exchange Act to comply with the requirements of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) of 2010 to facilitate the purchase and sale of qualified health plans and qualified dental plans in the individual market and to provide for the establishment of a small business health option program (SHOP exchange) to assist qualified small employers enrolling their employees in qualified health plans and dental plans offered in the small group market.  The intent of the exchange is to reduce the number of uninsured; provide a transparent marketplace; increase competition in the health insurance market; increase portability of health insurance coverage; reduce health care costs; provide consumer education; and assist individuals with access to programs, tax credits, and cost-sharing reductions….

Wow! That sounds good to me.

From the Journal of the House [pdf]:

THIRD READING OF HOUSE BILL – FEDERAL MANDATE

HCS#2 HB 609, relating to the Show-me Health Insurance Exchange, was taken up by

Representative Molendorp.

On motion of Representative Molendorp, HCS#2 HB 609 was read the third time and passed

by the following vote:

AYES: 157

Allen Anders Asbury Atkins Aull Bahr Barnes Bernskoetter Berry Black Brandom Brattin Brown 50 Brown 85 Burlison Carlson Carter Casey Cauthorn Cierpiot Colona Conway 14 Conway 27 Cookson Cox Crawford Cross Curtman Davis Day Denison Dieckhaus Diehl Dugger Ellinger Elmer Entlicher Faith Fallert Fisher Fitzwater Flanigan Fraker Franklin Franz Frederick Fuhr Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore Guernsey Haefner Hampton Harris Higdon Hinson Hodges Holsman Hoskins Hough Houghton Hubbard Hughes Hummel Johnson Jones 63 Jones 89 Jones 117 Kander Keeney Kelley 126 Kelly 24 Kirkton Klippenstein Koenig Korman Kratky Lair Lampe Lant Largent Lasater Lauer Leach Leara Lichtenegger Loehner Long Marshall McCaherty McCann Beatty McDonald McGeoghegan McGhee McManus McNary McNeil Meadows Molendorp Montecillo Nance Nasheed Neth Newman Nichols Nolte Oxford Pace Parkinson Peters-Baker Phillips Pierson Quinn Redmon Reiboldt Richardson Riddle Rizzo Rowland Ruzicka Sater Schad Scharnhorst Schatz Schieber Schieffer Schneider Schoeller Schupp Shively Shumake Sifton Silvey Smith 71 Smith 150 Solon Spreng Still Stream Swearingen Swinger Talboy Taylor Thomson Torpey Wallingford Walton Gray Webb Webber Wells Weter White Wieland Wright Wyatt Zerr Mr Speaker

NOES: 000

PRESENT: 000

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 005

Brown 116 Funderburk May Pollock Zimmerman

VACANCIES: 001

Speaker Tilley declared the bill passed.

Really? Unanimously. Think about that for a minute. Not one teabagger voted against a key component of health care reform.

Missouri Attoney General Chris Koster filed an amicus brief [pdf] today in a federal lawsuit challenging health care reform.

From Attorney General Koster’s letter to the leadership of the Missouri General Assembly:

…Although these are complex questions on which many scholars, judges, and interested parties sincerely disagree, it is the opinion of this office that the Congress reached beyond current Commerce Clause precedent when it regulated that individuals maintain “minimum essential [healthcare] coverage” or pay a penalty. Therefore, it follows that the federal courts, in reviewing this aspect of the law, must either expand Congress’ Commerce Clause authority, justify the provision on alternate constitutional grounds, or strike down the individual mandate.

It is also the legal view of this office that the individual mandate is severable from the ACA and that those provisions of the bill not clearly dependant upon the mandate may stand. Our argument against the expansion of Congress’ Commerce Clause authority is emphatically not based on any opposition to the expansion of health coverage for uninsured Americans.

To the contrary, I favor the expansion of health coverage…

Those state insurance exchanges for individuals without insurance which were enabled by the federal health care reform law? Representative Chris Molendorp (r), Chair of the House Health Insurance Committee, has introduced a bill in the General Assembly to set up Missouri’s:

HB 609

Establishes the Show-Me Health Insurance Exchange Act

Sponsor: Molendorp, Chris (123)

Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2011

LR Number: 1237L.02I

Last Action: 2/23/2011 – Read Second Time (H)

Bill String: HB 609

Next Hearing: Hearing not scheduled

Calendar: Bill currently not on a calendar

The bill.

Interesting. There are no co-sponsors.

It doesn’t mean anyone to the left of Attila the Hun and Tea Partiers. Socialism, according to Wikipedia, advocates “public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.” The public isn’t going to own hospitals or medical practices. It’s going to regulate them. Not that I would mind a little more socialism in this country. We’ve always had it:

Public libraries. Check.

Fire departments. Check.

Police departments. Check.

Public roads. Check.

Public schools. Check.

Hell, until Dubya farmed it out to private contractors, the military was socialistic.

But (yawn) Phyllis Schlafly expects us to scream in horror at that vile socialist, Barack Hussein Obama.

…………………..

Coverage of the Ed Martin event has been thorough on the Missouri progressive blogosphere. St. Louis Activist Hub, in fact, has three postings:

• I Don’t Care What You Say, It Was A Great Night For Health Reform
• Ed Martin Forgets His Supporters, Claims People “Know How To Be Civil”
• Ed Martin, Bill Hennessey Hide in the Back of Their Own Forum: Schlafly Bolts!

FiredUp! has one: This Is What a Better Informed and Better Organized Movement Looks Like.

Women’s Voices Raised for Social Justice has a posting on its Facebook Page: Women’s Voices Members speak out at Health Care Forum

All that is in addition to my first piece, In which I explain who showed up for Ed Martin’s dance; my two videos–so far–of Schlafly: MS. Schlafly takes on “Obamacare” and But, but … I thought Republicans liked police states.; and a video of Harvey Ferdman, Harvey Ferdman takes the health care reform conversation to common ground.